Posted by 101livescan on 11/18/13 12:32pm
Msg #493148

For notaries who have unpaid signings by bankrupt ANS

Page 9 of bankrupty papers describe the different type of bankruptcy, #2-3 uses the words “improper conduct”

2. The Four Chapters of the Bankruptcy Code Available to Individual Consumer Debtors
Chapter 7: Liquidation ($245 filing fee, $46 administrative fee, $15 trustee surcharge: Total Fee $306)
1. Chapter 7 is designed for debtors in financial difficulty who do not have the ability to pay their existing debts. Debtors
whose debts are primarily consumer debts are subject to a "means test" designed to determine whether the case should be
permitted to proceed under chapter 7. If your income is greater than the median income for your state of residence and
family size, in some cases, creditors have the right to file a motion requesting that the court dismiss your case under §
707(b) of the Code. It is up to the court to decide whether the case should be dismissed.
2. Under chapter 7, you may claim certain of your property as exempt under governing law. A trustee may have the right to
take possession of and sell the remaining property that is not exempt and use the sale proceeds to pay your creditors.
3. The purpose of filing a chapter 7 case is to obtain a discharge of your existing debts. If, however, you are found to have
committed certain kinds of improper conduct described in the Bankruptcy Code, the court may deny your discharge and,
if it does, the purpose for which you filed the bankruptcy petition will be defeated.


Googled improper conduct, and this came up

The debtor’s purpose in filing a chapter 7 case is to obtain a discharge of existing debts. If, however, the debtor is found to have committed certain kinds of improper conduct described in the Bankruptcy Code such as fraud, hiding assets, disobeying court orders, etc., the court may deny the debtor’s discharge. If so, the debtor’s purpose for filing the bankruptcy petition will be defeated


I think that expensive vacations to Cancun, Las Vegas, Silicon boobies and households full of new appliances and furniture might fall under this category.

In the BK filing, Amanda Kirkish says she is the only owner of ANS, but remember earlier this year, she informed us there are four owners (the Kirkish's and the Mendoza's we learned were signing checks from their USBank account). The Judge will hear of this!

At least one notary who was stiffed by ANS for $1300 is going to challenge this bankruptcy, joined by others who are owed $2000, $2100 and lesser amounts.

To boot, I wonder how the borrowers in these unpaid transactions would like hearing that the owners of the SS hired by Valuamerica and funded by BofA was convicted of ID fraud and forgery. We're about to learn of their reactions in a major reaction by these clients.

In any case, this BK filing is, guess what, FRAUDULENT! Well who cares, the attorney collected $3000 from the Kirkishes to prepare. Do you think she gives a rat's A$$ if the information is not correct?

Reply by Jack/AL on 11/18/13 12:44pm
Msg #493150

I was fortunate to have done only one signing for ANS, and was paid after a little bit of delay and bother. In reference to whether Amanda was the only owner, I recall that in response to posts on this forum, months ago, there were postings by different so-called owners. More than one responder identified himself/herself as "an owner," or "one of the owners" of ANS. I though it odd that the responses were posted, for they did not resolve any issues and sometimes conflicted with previous posts from ANS.

Reply by 101livescan on 11/18/13 12:55pm
Msg #493153

This is dumber than dumb, Jack, but really, no one asked Amanda how many owners there were, she volunteered the information as well as to tell us Sara Kirkish was an owner, and there is no Sara Kirkish. Remember Martha, there's no Martha either, the purported A/R person, and a host of other fictitious names were provided on the whim of Amanda Kirkish, who refuses to accept responsibility for her actions, over and over. Employees were Michelle, Lola, Carrie, Meghan that we know of, but Amanda did not run a business, she had no workmen's comp policy, nor did she pay employment taxes to the EDD. All were paid under the table with no deductions, as were the Mendoza's and the Kirkish's. I would love to see their tax returns and 1099s. The IRS needs to have a peek into this business's legitimacy.

She is the Queen of Deception, Dishonor and Deceit, proven and demonstrated repeatedly. I can't wait for the BK hearing and all these notaries to be there to present their case for Kirkish's BK dismissal, mandating Amanda pay all these notaries.

The notaries can also ask for liquidation of assets, like household furnishings, and automobiles. I doubt there is anything that can be had from a set of used silicon breasts, however.

Reply by jba/fl on 11/18/13 1:09pm
Msg #493155

"I doubt there is anything that can be had from a set of used silicon breasts, however."

I don't know - deflation would be interesting to some. kind of a vengence.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 11/18/13 1:29pm
Msg #493159

Here's some impoetant information for those who are owed...

Here are some of post references...

Msg #462123 "Rebuttal and apology"

Msg #462218 - Where a person named Sara Kirkish, claiming to be "one of the owners" -- which puts Amanda's claim that she was the sole owner with no partners (which she signed under penalty of perjury) suspect.

Msg #462242 - Again, "Sara" posts and states that there are 4 owners, Sara is one, Amanda is another. Who are the other two?


Honestly, I think that the BK trustee and the judge handling their case should be aware of the fact that they claim to have been a sole owner, yet elsewhere claimed to have partners and multiple owners. I think that's might be a little bit of an issue for them if enough people bring it to the attention of the court.

The easiest way to do this is to write to the trustee handling the case directly... or you can show up at their 341 hearing in December.

The 341 hearing (where the Kirkishes MUST be there) and where creditors can show up:

12/19/2013 at 09:00 AM at RM 103
3801 University Ave., Riverside, CA 92501



Trustee information assigned to their case:

Case: 6:13-bk-28607-MW
Jason Lee Kirkish and Amanda Marie Kirkish
Chapter 7, Filed 11/14/2013

Trustee: Karl T Anderson (TR)
City: Palm Springs
Phone: (760) 778-4889
Email: [e-mail address]

Trustee: United States Trustee (RS)
City: Riverside Phone: (951) 276-6990
Fax: (951) 276-6973
Email: [e-mail address]

And the attorney representing the Kirkishes:

Atty: Karen E Lockhart
Phone: 951-698-5191
Fax: 951-698-5192
Email: [e-mail address]


You guys should know that now that they have filed, federal law prohibits you from contacting the Kirkishes for payment. You need to contact their attorney, Karen Lockhart, or send information about your claim to the trustee. If you were one of the hundreds of notaries listed in their petitions, you'll get a letter from the BK court any day now. If You don't get a letter and you have a claim, then you need to submit to the attorney or the trustee to get in on it. The more notaries who submit claims, the more this may end up getting converted to a Chapter 11, which means you might get a little bit of your money rather than nothing at all.

Also, in case you don't know, their initial BK petition listed TONS of "contractors" that they owe, but the amount listed is "unknown" for just about all of them -- if you get a letter from the court regarding the BK filing, do NOT ignore it. Respond to the trustee with copies of your invoices and fee agreements to the amount owed can be revised.

I have a copy of the petition, including the list of all the notaries they listed. The petition is nearly 1000 pages long!

Reply by 101livescan on 11/18/13 1:35pm
Msg #493161

Re: Here

A number of people who are my friends are listed on this petition filing. They were paid. I guess Amanda listed everyone because she can't remember who was and who was not paid???

I also learned about a dozen of my competition in my two counties who worked for Amanda at her very low pay offerings. Wonder how many of these people got paid/stiffed?

Amazing, over 2500 notaries listed in this petition.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 11/18/13 2:07pm
Msg #493163

Re: Here

Not only that... they have no clue clue how much any of them are owed...

Unless, of course, they intend to modify the petition later. It looks really weird that all of these notaries are simply listed as "unknown" -- that's kind of ridiculous.

My guess is that they rushed the BK filing to prevent any seizure of assets from the judgment against them.